Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Second Affirmative Constructive (2AC) is the second speech given by the affirmative team, the third speech in the round, given by the second affirmative speaker. The 2AC must answer all of the arguments read in the 1NC. If there is time remaining, the 2AC sometimes also includes add-ons, or additional advantage scenarios.
In policy debate (also called cross-examination debate in some circuits, namely the University Interscholastic League of Texas), the Affirmative is the team that affirms the resolution and seeks to uphold it by developing, proposing, and advocating for a policy plan that satisfies the resolution.
Most resolutions from the 1920s to 2005 have begun "Resolved: that The United States federal government should" although some variations from that template have been used both before the NDT-CEDA merger and with the 2006–2007 college policy debate topic, which limited the affirmative agent to the United States Supreme Court.
The case is the advocacy established by the Pro in the First affirmative constructive speech, often constructed around the support of a policy recommendation known as the affirmative plan. While the 1AC defines the parameters for the bulk of an affirmative's argument, the term "case" can be used to cover the entirety of the affirmative argument ...
Value debate: A value debate is one that is about a specific value, such as individual rights or Justice. In a value debate the teams are expected to argue the importance of concepts and not extensively a policy. Paradigms: The specific likes and dislikes of a Judge; Solvency: The extent to which a particular resolution or plan will effect change.
In competitive debate, an advantage is the way that the affirmative team refers to the positive consequences of adopting their position on the debate resolution.It is an argument structure that seeks to convince the judge that the affirmative plan, if adopted, would result in a net-beneficial improvement to the status quo.
The two sides alternate, with the affirmative getting the first and last speeches of the round and the negative getting the last constructive and the first rebuttal in the middle. Most affirmative teams present a specific policy option, or plan, as a normative defence of the resolution.
Topicality: The Affirmative case must affirm the resolution, since that is the job of the Affirmative in a debate round. The Affirmative case often is shown to be within the bounds of the resolution as defined by appropriate definitions, or functional implementation or resolution instrumentality through the Affirmative plan. When the resolution ...